Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : SOUTHERNERA (t.SUF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steven Ivanyi who wrote (611)	1/23/1998 11:33:00 PM
From: bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7235

Someone told me on another thread that small orders being filled like this may be someone short selling. I've been keeping a close eye on SUF because I'd like to buy some. I'm holding off on the chance that the litigation will continue for a bit. My experience is that buyers are wary of litigation. Take a look at PDG and KRY. There are lots of other examples. Often the litigator isn't really looking for a straightforward settlement but is willing to prolong matters. A lot of companies will make an exorbitant payment to those pressing the suit. That's the only way to get rid of uncertainty and resume business. It has nothing to do with the ultimate merit of the suit. In the mining business, find a rich property and you'll be certain to have any number of people appear out of the woodwork wanting to sue you. It seems to be part of the game.The game can be played simply as "I can tie you up for a year or more, make it hard for you top get financing, create uncertainty." Give me a million bucks and I'll leave. This is probably not be the case with SUF and they have set up a contingency fund and SA may process these cases quickly but investors in mining stocks have learned to be wary the moment they hear that there is legal action.